Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
AN ENHANCED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CONDUCTING PCA ANALYSIS ON
DATA SIGNALS
TECHNICAL FIELD
The present application pertains generally to the field of
condition monitoring. More specifically, the present
application relates to fault detection and diagnosis.
BACKGROUND
Fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) can be used for End of Line
Testing (EOL). In EOL testers, the purpose is to test the
manufactured products as a quality control measure. If the
product passes the test, it is processed and prepared for
shipment. If the product fails the test, the product is withheld
from shipment. Industry favours not only the detection of
faults but also the troubleshooting for the root cause of that
fault. Industry therefore favours the performance of fault
diagnosis/isolation.
Fault diagnosis/isolation is important to identify and correct
the root cause of the problem as fast as possible and to thereby
reduce manufacturing costs. In industry, rotational components
such as electric motors are very commonly used, and, since these
components are prone to manufacturing issues, robust quality
control measures are required. For this reason, manufacturers
use Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD) systems installed on EOL
testers to perform the required fault detection and analysis.
Industrial FDD applications are subject to stringent
requirements. These requirements vary from timing restrictions,
- 1 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
robustness, to environmental disturbances, accuracy, and ease of
= use for operators. The timing restriction is particularly
pronounced in real-time applications and in production lines.
The manufacturing environment also contains undesired
disturbances and noise that affects FDD systems and its testing,
especially if sound and vibrations are measurements used to
detect and diagnose manufacturing faults. These disturbances can
alter the test results if they are not filtered out. Lastly,
FDD testers are usually operated by manufacturing line workers.
As such, manufacturers prefer FDD testers to be very easy to use
in order to eliminate any need for highly qualified, trained
technical personnel to operate these testers.
The concept of FDD in EOL testers can be extended and applied to
the field of monitoring machine health. In machine health
13 monitoring, the FDD system is run continuously on the same
machine instead of running it once per product in the case of
EOL testers. However, regardless of this difference, the
underlying FDD tool used is exactly the same in both
applications.
One practical example of where FDD technology would be useful
would be in the field of automotive starters and alternators.
In the industry relating to automotive starters and alternators,
parts are usually given only a few seconds to be tested due to
the high throughput of manufacturing. Automotive starters and
alternators can suffer from both low and high frequency faults.
Preferably, an FDD system should be able to detect both types of
faults robustly in noisy environments. Also preferably, any FDD
system should also be able to display a clear readable result
that an operator can use without the need for FDD technical
training.
- 2 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
= Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
Current FDD methods vary from the simple to the complex. The
most basic methods used in industry involve simple measurements
of such physical manifestations as vibration or sound. Such
methods evaluate vibration and sound Root Mean Square (RMS)
values for an arbitrary period of time. Slightly more complex
systems utilize more statistical measures such as Peak-To-Peak
levels, Crest Factor, Kurtosis, and skewness in the measured
variables. An example of using kurtosis is shown by Sawalhi,
N., et al., "The enhancement of fault detection and diagnosis in
rolling element bearings using minimum entropy deconvolution
combined with spectral kurtosis", (2007). Another temporal signal
= example is shown in the patent publication US20130024164 by
Paajarvi, P., et al., "Method for rolling bearing fault
detection based on enhancing statistical asymmetry". In this
publication, a linear filter is used to filter and differentiate
ball bearing impulses from noise.
The above methods are all based on time signals (temporal
= methods) and they analyze one signal at a time. Usually, signals
that measure phenomena such as sound and vibration acquire the
same events that occur when testing a part. This includes events
such as, for example, ball bearing failures. Preferably, to
maximize fault detection and isolation performance, different
signals are analyzed simultaneously. Multiple signals analyzed
simultaneously gives rise to the use of multivariate analysis
and, in this field, Principal Components Analysis (PCA) is
commonly used for such analyses. PCA models the correlation
structure between different signals and thus acknowledges the
shared information content between different signals. Numerous
references (both patent publications and academic papers) use
PCA for FDD due to FDD's efficiency and abilities. In one
example, US Patent U58676538 by Purdy, M. A. ("Adjusting
weighting of a parameter relating to fault detection based on a
- 3 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
detected fault"), PCA is used in a dynamic weighting technique
for performing fault detection. This reference discusses
application of PCA in semiconductors and explains how PCA can be
used to improve fault detection reliability through a feedback
system. In patent publication EP2950177A1, Dutta, P., et al.
("Asset condition monitoring"), a machine monitoring application
uses PCA and uses information gathered through different
sensors. In this reference, PCA is used as for feature
extraction as well as a dimensional reduction method alongside,
in parallel, a pre-processor and a classifier. The results from
the parallel branches are compared with the known faults.
The above noted methods analyze measurements in a temporal form.
However, in many cases it is known that faults can be detected
and isolated by the inspection of a signal's frequency content.
In Yang, H., et al.,"Vibration feature extraction techniques for
fault diagnosis of rotating machinery: a literature
survey", (2003), Yang shows different types of temporal and
frequency domain based FDD systems. Frequency domain systems
start from simple spectrum methods, as shown in Ghorbanian, V.,
et al.,"A survey on time and frequency characteristics of
induction motors with broken rotor bars in line-start and
inverter-fed modes",(2015). In this reference, it is shown that
broken bar faults in motors cause different peaks in the
spectrum of faulty motors. Peak frequencies depend on the slip
factor (s), which represents the lag between the magnetic
field's speed and the rotor speed.
Similarly to pure temporal methods, spectral methods have been
used to analyze a signal in only one domain. A method that
analyzes the measured signal in both spectral as well as
temporal domains may be used to obtain the benefits of both
domains. For that reason, wavelets may be used. In US Patent
- 4 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
US6727725B2, Devaney, M. J., et al. ("Motor bearing damage
detection via wavelet analysis of the starting current
transient") wavelets and, specifically, Discrete Wavelet
Transform (DWT), were used to detect bearing faults during motor
start-up transient measurements.
While wavelets are useful, the issue of maximizing fault
information from multiple measurements arises again in
frequency/time domain methods, including in methods that use
wavelets. To address this issue, Bakshi, B. R.,"MulLiscale PCA
with application to multivariate statistical process
monitoring", (1998) DWI was combined with PCA in a new method
called Multi-Scale PCA (MSPCA). In this method, DWT is used to
decompose the signal in different frequency bandwidth levels and
then PCA analysis is performed on each level to detect faults as
shown in Figure 1. One application of MSPCA is shown in
Bendjama, H., et al.,"Fault Diagnosis of Rotating Machinery
Using Wavelet Transform and Principal Component
Analysis",(2010). In this reference, MSPCA is used along with
= contribution plots to isolate the faults once they are detected
using MSPCA. MSPCA is based on PCA for fault detection and
therefore depends on comparing the measured signals with a
baseline (in-control model) signal. This is notable as a
baseline needs to exist for MSPCA to be able to detect faults.
The typical steps for MSPCA with Reconstruction Based
Contribution (RBC) plots for isolation is as shown in Figure 2.
These steps are described in detail in Haqshenas, S.
R.,"Multiresolution-Multivariate Analysis of Vibration Signals;
Application in Fault Diagnosis of Internal Combustion
Engines", (2013)
The above discussion shows that a number of advances in the
field of FDD have occurred. However, these current methods have
- 5 -
CA 29653.10 201.7-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
a number of existing limitations. One limitation is in fault
frequency detection resolution: DWI decomposes the measured
signals at different levels but these levels are not equal in
frequency bandwidths. As shown in Figure 3, the first level
detail coefficients bandwidth (D1) is half of the bandwidth for
the signals. This causes problems when different faults exhibit
themselves in the high frequency bandwidth, as PCA will detect
these faults at the same level, making the fault signatures
similar. This causes high frequency faults to be inseparable.
Another limitation of the current FDD methods occurs when PCA
detects faults at different levels. The fault sensitivity varies
from one level to another due to wavelets and PCA
transformations. This is unfavourable behaviour as it decreases
the whole system's accuracy in diagnosing faults across
different frequencies.
A third limitation of the current methods is that fault
diagnosis and determination using Contribution plots is not very
accurate. This lack of accuracy is due to the same reason as the
second limitation: if two similar severity faults exist in two
measured signals, contribution plots will detect them with
different sensitivity, thereby showing one fault having a higher
severity over the other. This causes a limitation in diagnosis
accuracy.
A fourth limitation relates to the efficiency of the current
methods. In systems such as the one used in the above noted
patent reference EP2950177A1, Dutta, P., et al., ("Asset
condition monitoring"), PCA is performed N times, where N is the
number of known conditions. This is not the most efficient
design for a complex analysis that uses PCA and wavelets.
A final limitation of current methods is that current systems do
not account for normal meandering changes that happen over a
- 6 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
long time span in a manufacturing environment. Such changes
affect the measurements but are not necessarily related to
faults. One example of such changes is humidity. Normal humidity
fluctuations have effects on sound measurements and can thereby
affect not just the measurements but any analysis based on such
measurements.
From the above, there is therefore a need for systems and
methods which mitigate if not overcome the limitations and
shortcomings of the prior art.
SUMMARY
The present invention provides systems and methods relating to
fault detection and diagnosis. Signals received from sensors
are first filtered to remove noise and are then analyzed using
wavelet packet transform (WPT) based PCA. The results of the PCA
analysis are then automatically classified to thereby quickly
and easily determine what issues there may be in a finished
product or in a machine being monitored.
In one aspect, the present invention provides a signal based
fault detection and 'diagnosis system called Industrial Extended
Multi-Scale Principle Components Analysis (=SPCA). One
implementation of the present invention uses a filtration block,
a detection and extraction block, and an automatic
classification block. The filtration block filLers out
background noise while the detection and filtration block uses
wavelets, PCA, and statistical indices to detect and extract
faults from measured physical signals. The classification block
classifies faults detected by the detection and extraction
block.
- 7 -
ak 2965340 201.7-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
In one implementation, the system combines well known tools,
such as wavelets and Principal Components Analysis (PCA) as well
as a new statistical index to develop a robust end-To-end fault
detection and diagnosis solution for industrial use. The system
is further uses a noise filter to boost its robustness in noisy
environments. In addition, the system has an automatic
classifier to provide easily readable results. This simplifies
the user interface and omits the previous need for highly
trained technical personnel to operate the system. The
classifier also has 'a self-adapting dynamic feature to cope with
meandering changes in manufacturing environments.
The systems and methods of the present invention possess
numerous benefits and advantages over traditional and the state-
of-the-art Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD) methods such as
Multi-Scale Principle Components Analysis (MSPCA). In
particular, using Wavelet Packet Transform (WPT) instead of
Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) allows for a finer high
frequency resolution. This results in better detection and
isolation for high frequency faults. Moreover, introducing a new
statistical index allows the fault detection and isolation
process to be performed efficiently, thereby reducing the
overall FDD processing time. This statistical index produces a
unique fault signature per fault type. The use of a unique fault
signature allows for the identification of the types of problems
existing in a given machine.
The new statistical index noted above is different than what is
found in the state-of-the-art statistical methods. This index
allows for the detection of faults in different frequency
bandwidths evenly. The state-of-the-art statistical methods
currently used are more sensitive to faults in some frequency
bands over the other, which introduces uncertainty in fault
- 8 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
detection. This uncertainty is eliminated by the new statistical
processing method. Another advantage to the introduced
statistical index is that it detects faults across different
input signals evenly. In other words, faults that exist in
different input signals are detected with the same sensitivity
and therefore result in more robust and accurate fault
isolation.
In a first aspect, the present invention provides a system for
analyzing signals from at least one sensor, the system
= 10 comprising:
- a filter module for filtering background noise from
data signals to produce filtered signals, said data
signals being received from said at least one sensor;
- a PCA analysis module for conducting Principal
Components Analysis (PCA) on said filtered signals using
a wavelet packet transform (WPT);
- a classifier module for classifying fault results from
said PCA analysis module;
wherein said data signals represent physical
measurements measured by said at least one sensor.
In a second aspect, .the present invention provides a method for
analyzing signals from at least one sensor, the method
comprising:
a) filtering background noise from data signals to
produce filtered signals, said data signals being
received from said at least one sensor;
b) conducting Principal Components Analysis (PCA) on
said filtered signals;
- 9 -
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
c)
classifying fault results from said PCA analysis
module;
wherein said data signals represent physical
measurements measured by said at least one sensor and
said filtered signals are normalized prior to step b).
In a third aspect, the present invention provides a system for
analyzing faults in a machine, the system comprising:
at least one sensor coupled to said machine, said at least
one sensor being for measuring at least one physical value
potentially related to said faults, wherein said at least one
sensor produces data signals based on said at least one physical
value; and
a processor configured for:
- filtering background noise from said data signals to thereby
produce filtered signals;
- conducting Principal Components Analysis (PCA) on said
filtered signals using a wavelet packet transform (WPT), to
thereby produce fault results;
- processing said fault results to produce fault signatures
that describe which data signals contain faults; and
- classifying said fault signatures; such that results of
said classifying provide information related to said faults;
wherein said system is used in End of Line testing of machinery;
wherein said processor is further configured for isolating
signals containing faults using at least one statistical index
- 10 ¨
Date Recue/Date Received 2020-11-30
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
that represents fault components in different frequency levels
and that describes which input signal contains faults.
In a fourth aspect, the present invention provides a method for
analyzing faults in a machine, the method comprising:
a) receiving data signals from at least one sensor coupled
to said machine, wherein said at least one sensor measures at
least one physical value potentially related to said faults and
wherein said data signals are based on said at least one
physical value;
b) filtering background noise from said data signals to
thereby produce filtered signals;
c) conducting Principal Components Analysis (PCA) on said
filtered signals to thereby produce fault results;
d) processing said fault results to produce fault
signatures that describe which data signals contain faults; and
e) classifying said fault signatures, such that results of
said classifying provide information related to said faults,
wherein said filtered signals are normalized prior to step c)
and wherein said Principal Components Analysis (PCA) on said
filtered signals is executed using a wavelet packet transform
(WPT); and wherein said method is executed for End of Line
testing of machinery;
wherein signals containing faults are isolated using at least
one statistical index that represents fault components in
different frequency levels and that describes which input signal
contains faults.
- 10a -
Date Recue/Date Received 2020-11-30
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
The embodiments of the present invention will now be described
by reference to the following figures, in which identical
reference numerals in different figures indicate identical
elements and in which:
FIGURE 1 illustrates a methodology for multi-scale PCA
according to the prior art;
FIGURE 2 details the steps for MSPCA and Contribution
plots FDD analysis according to the prior art;
FIGURE 3 shows DWT frequency levels bandwidths;
FIGURE 4 is a block diagram of a system according to one
aspect of the present invention;
FIGURE 5 schematically illustrates the effect of noise
on test measurements;
FIGURES 6A-6G illustrates features which may be used
with the noise gating method used with the present
invention;
FIGURE 7 show noise gating time domain segments;
- 10b -
Date Recue/Date Received 2020-11-30
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
FIGURE 8 illustrated the FFTs of noise and real
measurements signals;
FIGURE 9 illustrate Lhe effects of frequency bin
thresholding;
FIGURE 10 show the FFT of a filtered signal;
FIGURE 11 schematically illustrates the noise gate
method according to one implementation of the present
invention;
FIGURE 12 is a flowchart detailing the steps in a method
for filtering background noise that may be used with the
present invention;
FIGURE 13 schematically illustrates the DWT of a signal
with 128 samples;
FIGURE 14 schematically illustrates FDD decomposition as
practiced using MSPCA;
FIGURE 15 schematically illustrates the WPT of a signal
with 128 samples;
FIGURE 16 illustrated the frequency bandwidths of WPT
coefficients;
FIGURES 17A-17C illustrate fault cases that are
undetectable using MSPCA but are detectable using the
present invention;
FIGURE 18 schematically illustrates normalization in
MSPCA and in Lhe present invention;
FIGURE 19 illustrates an alternator fault signature;
- 11 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No..1022P005CA01
FIGURE 20 is a flowchart detailing the steps in a method
according to one aspect of the present invention;
FIGURE 21 illustrates an S-shape for a logistic
discriminant classifier;
FIGURE 22 is a flowchart detailing the steps in a method
using a logistic discriminant classifier according to
one aspect of the present invention;
FIGURE 23 is a flowchart detailing the steps in a method
using a dynamic classifier according to another aspect
of the present invention;
FIGURE 24 schematically illustrates a class window
updating scheme using a FIFO sequencing where all the
window are updated (left side) and where only half of
the window is updated (right side);
FIGURE 25 is a flowchart detailing the steps in a method
according to yet another aspect of the present
invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
In one aspect of the present invention, a block diagram of the
inventive FDD system is shown in Figure 4. The system consists
of three main stages: (1) filtration of background noise stage,
(2) a stage for the detection and extraction of the fault
signatures using wavelets, PCA, and statistical indices, and (3)
a stage for the automatic classification of faults. More
specifically, the system uses noise gating for the background
noise filtration stage, wavelet packet transform (WPT) for the
- 12 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
wavelet analysis stage, and a logistic discriminant for the
automatic classification stage.
The present invention may be used in industrial applications
and, as such, differenL features may be important such as noise
rejection. For some applications, typical industrial environment
noise must be rejected and filtered out to avoid its effects on
the analysis which can alter the FDD system's results. Another
important aspect is the usability of the system. It would
therefore be preferable that the system output a simple readable
result and it would also be preferable that the system not
require highly qualified technical personnel to understand and
interpret its results. These preferences have shaped the design
of the technology described herein. In one exemplary
implementation, the system therefore filters the inputs,
extracts existing fault signatures, and translates the detected
fault signatures into a readable form. These three steps are
shown in Figure 4.
The first stage of the system, performed in one embodiment by a
filter module, is background noise filtration. This field is
very well-studied, and, as such, this stage embodies a smart
selection for the right method to work seamlessly with the FDD
core of the system. In noise filtration, there arc two main
subcategories for the spectrum based filtration category, (1)
spectral subtraction, and (2) spectrum attenuation based
methods. Both subcategories take a sample of the noise profile
and then filter the main signal. In spectral subtraction, the
spectrum of the noise profile is subtracted from the main signal
spectrum. This subcategory of noise filtration methods is
discussed in details in Boll, S. F.,"Suppression of acoustic
noise in speech using spectral subtraction", (1979), and in Lim,
J. S., et al.,"Enhancement and bandwidth compression of noisy
- 13 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
speech", (1979). The other subcategory which is used in the
system embodying the invention is that of spectrum attenuation
methods. In this subcategory the spectrum of the measured
signals is attenuated at a chosen set of frequencies. This set
of frequencies is found by comparing the signal spectrum with
the noise profile spectrum. One of these spectrum attenuation
methods is called the Noise Gating method. The Noise Gating
concept is explained in Hodgson, J.,"Understanding Records: A
Field Guide to Recording Practice",(2010). More information
about Noise Gating can be found in literature such as in
Martinek, R., et al.,"Novel signal gate solution suitable for
implementation in audio and recording technologies", (2012)
In Figure 5, an example of the background noise found in sound
measurements in industrial environments is shown. The noise
13 gating method filters noise by applying a threshold and, if the
real measurement is higher than the background noise, the gate
will be open and the output level will be the same as the input
level. Otherwise the gate is closed, and the noise is filtered
out. An explanation of the gating concept along with Noise
Gating features is provided below with reference to Figures 6A
to 6F.
Referring to Figure 6A, the figure shows the basic concept on
the Noise Gating. If the input level is below the threshold
level, then the output level is the same as the input level.
However, if the input level is below the threshold level, then
the input is suppressed or not allowed through the gate.
Figure 6E illustrated the attack time feature the may be used in
conjunction with the noise gating method. This feature smoothly
opens the gate to avoid any sudden jumps or clicks in the
filtered signal.
- 14 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
Referring to Figure 6C, illustrated is the hold time feature
which may be used with the noise gating method. This feature
keeps the gate open for a certain time after the signal level
falls below the threshold.
Referring to Figure 6D, illustrated is the release time feature
which may be used with the noise gate method. For this feature,
an attack time is used, the gate is held open for an amount of
time after the signal level drops below the threshold and the
gate is gradually closed.
In Figure 6E, the attenuation range is shown. This attenuation
range defines how much the signal is attenuated by when the gate
is closed.
In Figures 6F and 6G, the hysteresis effect is shown by
introducing upper agd lower values for the threshold. The gate
opens when the noisy signal is higher than the upper threshold
and closes when it falls below the lower threshold.
Other features such as the Look-Ahead function may also be
implemented. The Look-Ahead function allows the gate to open
ahead of time to capture sudden events in the signal. This is
because the attack time gradually opens the gate once the signal
levels cross the threshold. Without the look ahead function,
sudden events will be attenuated and not captured in the
filtered signal.
It should be noted that while all the previous features are
explained in the time domain, noise gating is a spectral method
and thus depends on the frequency domain. Therefore the gate
opens and closes based on individual frequency bins. To explain
that further, the measured noisy signal such the one shown in
Figure 7 is broken down into small time segments (with a size of
- 15 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
time constant T). For each window, the spectrum is found by
using a Fourier Frequency Transform (FFT) and individual
frequency bin levels are found. Each frequency bin includes the
power level at a specific frequency. The number of the frequency
bins depends on the spectrum size (y). Each time segment
spectrum is compared with the noise profile spectrum. Assuming
that only ten frequency bins are created, an output example of a
segment and noise FFTs is shown in Figure 8. By comparing the
level of frequency bins between the measured and the noise
signals, the gate is either deployed or not. As an example, in
Figure 9 it can be seen that the level of the frequency bins of
the measurement (dark) compared to the noise (light) are not
satisfactorily larger for some bins (circled in black). Hence,
applying the gate at these frequency bins would filter out the
signal and the output will be as shown in Figure 10.
The last step that is applied before performing the Inverse
Fourier Frequency Transform (IFFT) is the Frequency Smoothing
feature. This feature is implemented to prevent sudden changes
in the tones between two frequency bins. The Frequency Smoothing
feature is basically a moving average for the frequency bin
levels. The width of the moving average window is determined by
the user and given the symbol (Aco). The feature smooths the
frequency bins as shown in Equation 1.
7- =-43w,f2 spectrum(ea+ v)
v
spectrum(co) = (1)
won her cVfreqvency enris
The summary of the noise gating method is shown in Figure 11. In
the figure, the signal is broken into both time and frequency
domains. Frequency bins in each time segment are attenuated if
- 16 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
the signals crossed the noise profile threshold. Other features
such as frequency smoothing, attack time, hold time, release
time, hysteresis, and attenuation range are also applied to
enhance the quality of the background noise isolation across all
time segments. The steps for applying Noise Gating are shown in
a flow chart in Figure 12. The steps are as follows:
- obtain the noise profile sample (step 10);
- the noise sample is divided into small time domain
windows, and each window width is defined by 7 (step 20);
- calculate the spectrum of each noise window using FFT
with spectrum size y (step 20);
- at each frequency, the maximum level of different
noise windows is found (step 30);
- the threshold vector is stored, and it has the maximum
levels at each frequency as defined in the last step
(step 30);
- the sound signal is obtained and split into segments
similar to the noise signal using a window width T, and
then calculate each segment's FFT with the size of y
(step 40);
- each segment's EFT frequency levels is compared with
the defined threshold (step 50); and
When the sound frequency levels is lower than the
23 threshold, different features such as attack, hold and
release times (p, and p) are applied, then the
attenuation range A and smoothing of the resulting
- 17 -
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
frequency bins with the width of Aw from Equation 1 are
applied (step 60).
Once the noise is filtered out from the measured signals, the
signals are ready for the FDD analysis. The second stage or
module of the system is the core of the FDD analysis. The
inventors have terms this analysis the Extended Multi-Scale
Principle Components Analysis (EMPSCA). This tool extends the
capabilities of MSPCA and hence the name. A number of
innovations are introduced in this stage. MSPCA uses DWT to
decompose the measured signals into frequency levels. The
coefficients of each level have a bandwidth of frequencies that
the measured signal contains. However the bandwidth varies from
a level to another. DWT levels are shown in Figure 13 with the
signal's spectrum broken down in Figure 3. The bandwidth of each
level is shown in Table 1, where Af is the bandwidth of each
frequency level.
The different bandwidths cause a problem in detecting the
bandwidth of detected faults in MSPCA. To clarify this further
in MSPCA, PCA is the tool which is responsible for fault
detection. As shown in Figure 14, the inputs to the PCA tool are
the samples/coefficients of DWT frequency levels. From Figure
14, it can be seen that when a fault is detected in the first
level (which contains half the spectrum), no further information
can be extracted about that fault. Thus, MSPCA cannot
differentiate between different high frequency faults. The
mathematical description of the DWT decomposition is shown in
Equations (2) and (3), where cj is the approximation coefficients
of level j. These coefficients are called approximation as they
result from the low pass filter g. Similarly di are the detail
coefficients of level j and they are called detail coefficients
as they result from the high pass filter h:
- 18 -
Date Recue/Date Received 2020-11-30
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
c1.4.1[n] = c g[2n]
(2)
61/41 [n] = ef >ic hi [272]
(3)
In EMPSCA or in one method aspect of the present invention,
another version of a wavelet transform is used. For this aspect,
the Wavelet Packet Transform (WPT) is used, and in it, both
outputs of the high and low pass filters are further filtered to
the next level. By comparison, in DWT only the output of the low
pass filter is broken down in the next level. WPT decomposition
can thus be as shown in Figure 15. The bandwidths of different
levels of WPT are shown in Figure 16, and are mathematically
described in Equations (4) and (5) below, where isij,k represent
the coefficients at level j for the atom k. If k is even, then
these coefficients result from low pass filtration. If k is odd
then these coefficients result from the high pass filtration.
Wpf-1,2X: [n] = n'rj.k * 9.42n1
(4)
W
j+1,2k4 [11 = hj [ 2 n]
(5)
As shown in Figure 16, the bandwidths of all atoms are equal
in this example).
16
The resulting coefficients from WPT are afterwards fed to a PCA
tool which has a design similar to the PCA tool used in MSPCA.
Because of this, when the PCA tool detects a fault in one of the
atoms, the fault can be isolated to that thin bandwidth. For
example, if it was assumed that there are two sinusoidal faults
- 19
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
in the measured signals that have ( -7-=-1767,andV-. 16 _______________ )
frequencies,
EMSPCA (or the system and method of the present invention) can
differentiate between these faults but MSPCA cannot.
Another step which generalizes the present method and
system is that of using a normalization technique on the
raw data. The motive behind this step is to allow the
system and method of the present invention to accurately
detect and diagnose faults in the case of different
measurement types. This is an issue when the measured
signals have different amplitudes levels and variances.
To understand the significance of this step, two fault
cases are illustrated and which are described in
relation to Figures 17A-17C. Figure 17A provides a
baseline signal while Figure 17B shows sound and
vibration measurements (based on the baseline signal)
with increasing individual signal variances. Figure 17C
shows the case where there is a variation in the mean of
the individual signals.
MSPCA depends on PCA for fault detection by examining the
correlation structure between the measured signals. Therefore,
if faults preserve the correlation structure between the
signals, they will be undetectable. The above noted two types of
faults (with increasing individual signal variances and with a
variation in the mean of individual signals) preserve the
correlation structure. In MSPCA and similar methods, PCA is used
in data normalization to scale the signals. This normalization
affects the feature extraction. Currently, there are two
normalization techniques in PCA analysis:
- 20 -
=
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
a - a normalization technique termed centered or
covariance PCA, where the mean value is subtracted from
the raw signals; and
b - a normalization technique termed correlation PCA
where the mean value of the raw signals is subtracted
and afterwards divided by the standard deviation of the
individual signals, which results in normalized data fed
to the PCA tool.
However in both methods the baseline signals are normalized
using their own centerlines and variances, and testing signals
are normalized using their own centerlines and variances, as
shown in Equation (6) and (7):
has eline eneaneafeiqbaselines tgnal)
Normalized baseline signal =
Varlance(baseline signet) ( 6)
t.g.sttn,g :ignal ¨ Irearivalue (testing signal)
ortnaltmi restilig sfgnal =
Vcrinn WU:sting signal) ( 7)
Applying the normalization in this manner allows the two faults
mentioned above to be undetectable by MSPCA. To solve this issue
the normalization technique is modified to thereby normalize the
testing signals using the baseline signal mean value and
variance as shown in Equation (8) and (9):
bas sivw signal ¨ mama 1.17;:te(baseitne signcl)
Normalized baseline signal = ______________________________
V arianeKbasOre signal) (8)
rig 5i,grut ¨mew-am lue(bassitrie s (gna(.)
Narnialized testing signal =
V ariance(baseline s gna I) (9)
This change enables the systems and methods of the present
invention (also known as EMSPCA) to detect faults that preserve
- 21 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
the correlation structure between measured signals. Moreover,
to avoid the effects of the wavelet transform on the
coefficients at different levels, the normalization step is
applied before the use of the wavelets transform in EMSPCA. This
is different from MSPCA where the normalization step is applied
before PCA step. This modification is illustrated in Figure 18.
Applying the new normalization (Equations (8)and (9)) along with
the sequencing shown in Figure 18 boosts the robustness of
EMSPCA in fault detection and diagnosis.
To detect faults using PCA analysis, a transformation (described
in Equation (10)) is applied on the measurements, where Xis the
measurement matrix formed by X = [xi x2 - A712] and where xi is a
column vector that represents the data of a measured signal. P
is called the Principal Components Loading matrix and it is a
matrix formed by columns of the eigenvectors of the measured
signals X. T is called the Principal Components scores and it is
a matrix T = [ti t2 tn] formed of the corresponding
uncorrelated signals to the cross-correlated signals X. The
covariance of the Principle Components scores T is shown in
Equation (11).
T=XP
(10)
1
= -TtT
n - I (11)
In many MSPCA app]ications, traditional statistical techniques
inherited from PCA analysis are used, such as Hotelling's T-
squared (T2) and Squared Prediction Error (SPE , p). Hotelling's
T2 and p are usually used for fault detection by comparing their
values with a threshold. However it is usually hard to define an
accurate threshold that does not detect normal noise as faults
- 22 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
and that detects low amplitude faults. For fault isolation,
contribution plots are usually used. However, contribution
plots do not always accurately show which signal carries the
fault. To solve these problems, two statistical indices are
presented in Haqshenas, S. R.,"Multiresolution-Multivariate
Analysis of Vibration Signals; Application in Fault Diagnosis of
Internal Combustion Engines", (2013). The first was introduced
for fault detection purpose. The index is called Sc and it
detects if any faults exist in different frequency levels. Sc is
described in Equation (12) where ET,testing and ET,baseline are
defined in Equations (13,14):
r:
= ,7
rEsc-in.g boSffiZZ;F,)
S.- -
Ai (12)
IT,,baseitme = C V(TbaseEine)= C 17(Xbasatina PbassZiner) (13)
/7,restins= C V(Ttesting) = C V(X testing Pb aseti et) (14)
In the Equations, Ai is the variance of Principal Components of
the baseline for signal I. The second index Haqshenas introduced
is called Fn and it was introduced for use in fault
diagnosis/isolation. Fc is defined as follows:
(7,1
Fc = COli( P) 0 COV(F)) 0 EA
( 1 5 )
\i=1
- 23 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
where EA = (Ai A2 _ An] is a vector that contains the
inverse of PC variances (Ai) and F is defined in Equation
(16) as faults component in he measured signals. This
faults component forms the difference between the
testing and the baseline signals. This is described in
Equation (16) by modeling faults in an additive form.
Xecreing. = baseline F (16)
These new indices that Haqshenas introduced (Sn,j, Fc)are
efficient and fast to calculate, but they suffer from the same
problems as 7.2,(1) and the contributing plots. The problems are
the different sensitivities of faults in fault detection across
different frequency levels and in fault diagnosis across input
signals. Applying the above mentioned normalization and
upgrading Fc allows Fc to be used for fault detection as well as
fault diagnosis. This upgrade is done to have equal quantitative
representation of faults in different frequency levels in Fc
index. This is shown in the following Equations:
sign(Li) 0 \I IL 21
(17)
Where,
' m
L = = sign(C017(0)1 0 [GOV(?) o COVVA =
(18)
Comparing Equations (17),(18) with Equation (15), the new Fc
statistic is different in that it:
removes the variance normalization (EA in Equation 15) --
the raw data is normalized in a better fashion as
- 24 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
discussed in Equations (8),(9) and with reference to
Figure 18;
introduces the square root in Equation (17) and thereby
assures equal representation of faults across various
levels and signals;
adds the sign function which is beneficial in case a new
observation has less vibration or sound levels -- when
the Fa sign becomes negative, this helps the classifier;
differentiates between additive and subtractive
differences. This consequently avoids misdiagnosis of an
observation as a faulty part, instead of assigning it as
a healthy part and vice-versa.
These differences boost fault detection and diagnosis abilities,
as Fc,i represents fault components in each frequency level and
describes which input signal contains faults. The output of Fc,j
is called the "fault signature", and when it is plotted in a bar
diagram it gives a unique shape per fault. An example of a fault
signature for an alternator is shown in Figure 19, where the
measurements are vibration and sound signals. The figure shows
that the faults are extracted as well as the severity of faults
in each frequency level. The plot also shows that it is easy to
detect which variable (sound or vibration) contains this
extracted fault at Which frequency.
For ease of reference, a summary of the steps of one method of
the present invention (termed the EMSPCA method) is shown in
Figure 20 as a flow chart and with reference to the relevant
equations described in this text. In this method, the initial
step is that of reading the baseline measurements (step 100).
The data from the measurements is then normalized (step 110).
- 25 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
= The baseline is then decomposed using WPT (step 120). PCA is
then used to transform the data into its main components (step
130). A new observation can then be made (step 140) and the
data from this new observation is normalized (step 150) using
the mean value and variance from the baseline measurements. The
normalized observations are then decomposed (step 160) and the
decomposed data is then transformed using the stored PCA loading
for each level (step 170). Statistical indices are then used to
detect and isolate faults on each level (step 180) and a fault
signature is generated for the new observation (step 190). The
generated fault signature is then sent to the classifier for
classification (step 200).
In the above described second stage, the method and system of
the present invention have been fine-tuned by using WPT, a smart
normalization technique, and by using a new statistical index
which represents a fault with even sensitivity across
different frequency levels and different input signals. These
changes allow EMSPCA (and the present invention) to reproduce
the same fault signature (with minor variations) for the same
fault. While these fault signature charts are very easy to
understand, for an industrial environment, further
simplification is required for the output to be readable by
operators. This is because a fault, such as bearing or armature
faults, may manifest its signatures in one measurement such as
the sound signal, or in multiple measurements. Therefore, domain
knowledge is required for mapping fault signatures to their
source in diagnostics. An automatic mapping omits the
requirement of having domain experts to read the fault
signature. For that reason, a classifier was implemented. The
classifier is trained in a supervised manner. In other words,
fault signatures are given to the classifier with the fault
label. Afterwards in testing, the classifier compares the fault
- 26 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No..1022P005CA01
signature which is under test with the known fault signatures.
The classifier produces a percentage representation how similar
the tested fault signature matches each of the known fault
signatures. In one implementation of the present invention, a
logistic discriminant classifier is used to perform the
classification step. For N faults, (N+1) binary logistic
discriminant classifiers are trained to account for all the
faults and the healthy baseline condition. Each classifier uses
the sigmoid function, described in Equation (19), to map a
linear function(a=wrF,i= wifi-i-wz/z4-...) to an S-shape curve which
is shown in Figure 21.
1
(wr F) _______________________________________
+ e-tv Fej (19)
It can be seen that, from Equation (19), the logistic
discriminant classifier uses the fault signature values (F,i) of
the training data samples to train the classifier (in training
mode) and then to test the classifier (in testing mode). In the
training mode, the requirement is to find the optimum linear
function weights (w in Equation 19) that maximize the success
rate of the classifier. The success rate is represented here by
the conditional probability P(D1w), where
is a matrix that contains the training data for n measurements,
and yi is the fault label for each measurement. This conditional
probability P(D1w) is defined further in Equation (20):
PP IVO = I P (-VE I
(20)
- 27 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
After the training is done and the optimum value of w is found,
any new fault signature similarity with a known fault signature
can be tested by calculating Equation (19) using the w and the
new fault signature values (F,i) which will result in a
percentage that represents the similarity between the new fault
signature and a known fault signature. The full process of
training the classifier and testing new fault signatures is
described in a flow chart in Figure 22 with reference to the
relevant equations described above.
The method illustrated in Figure 22 begins with the preparation
of the training dataset with labeled fault signatures (step
210). The classifier is then trained (step 220) and, once this
is done, a new observation's fault signature can be tested.
This is done (step 230) against different classes and the new
observation is assigned or classified to a class based on the
highest similarity score. If the new observation is the last,
then the classifier method ends (step 240). Otherwise, the
logic loops with obtaining another new observation (step 250)
and this is tested against the known classes of faults (step
230).
While the classifier in this setup gives very good results, it
does not account for the variations of fault signatures for the
same fault in the long run. In other words, the current
classifier always compares a new signature against the initial
fault signatures that the classifier was trained on. This is
not an Ideal setup as industrial environments tend to introduce
meandering, random effects or outliers (unrelated to faults)
which might manifest in the sensor measurements. These effects
or random variables may change in a manufacturing environment.
An example that has been known to cause random variation is
humidity, which might slowly affect sound measurements.
- 28 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
Preferably, the classifier is dynamic enough to allow a small
and meandering bias in the manufacturing system to occur, as
long as that bias is consistent with all measurements. This
dynamic effect is introduced by retraining the classifier in a
systematic way. An overview of such a retraining model is
defined in Figure 24. From Figure 24, the steps of the model are
as follows:
- the classifier with the labeled training dataset is
initiated and trained (step 300);
- the classifier runs over all healthy signatures in the
training dataset and the measurement that achieves the
highest score is selected as the new baseline (step
310);
=
- new observation measurements are obtained and its fault
signature is found (not shown);
- the classifier runs on that fault signature (step 320);
- if the classifier found the new signature to be healthy
(step 330) then one healthy signature in the healthy
training dataset (healthy window) is replaced with the
new signature (step 340) in First Input First Output
(FIFO) manner (see left side of Figure 24). Then the
classifier is retrained again (to find the new optimal w
in Equation 19). Afterwards the classifier runs again on
all healthy signatures to reselect the highest score
healthy measurement (step 350), which is considered the
center of the healthy signatures population.
- If the new signature is not healthy (step 330), then the
training dataset (fault window) of the related fault (a
- 29 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No..1022P005CA01
bearing fault for example) is updated in FIFO manner
(step 360);
- new measurements are obtained and the previous steps are
repeated.
The above method will allow the training dataset to change with
= time continuously. It should, however, be noted that, when the
dynamic classifier updates the healthy dataset it selects a new
baseline for the next observation test. To select the best
baseline, the classifier compares all the healthy training
window measurements and then selects the highest classification
score (based on the function cr(rirTFc,i)) as the new baseline. This
assures that the new baseline is the center of the complete
healthy population and consequently increases FDD accuracy.
It should also be noted that the dynamic classifier described
above is the first version of three versions of dynamic
classifiers which may be used with the present invention.
The second version varies of a dynamic classifier from the first
only in the updating frequency. Instead of retraining the
classifier each time a new fault signature is classified, the
classifier is updated only after testing k new fault signatures.
This change in the updating frequency reduces computational cost
and analysis time.
The third variation of the dynamic classifier is concerned with
the variation of fault signature space per fault. As in the
first two versions, the whole initial training dataset (fault
signatures) is updated with time based on classifier results. An
error could therefore accumulate in the dataset which reduces
the overall performance of the whole FDD system. The third
version introduces a parameter y which represents a fraction of
- 30 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
the training dataset. The y percentage is the only portion of
the dataset that is continuously updated, with the rest of the
initial dataset remaining the same in every retraining process.
The updating process uses a FIFO sequencing for the replacement
of signatures in the dataset (see right side of Figure 24). This
concept restrains error accumulation and limits the variation
from the initial training dataset. y values vary from 0 to 1
and, where (y =0), this disables the dynamic update feature and
forces the classifier to use only the initial set of fault
signatures. When (y=1), this allows the classifier to update
the whole dataset with new fault signatures.
The classifier step or module is an end step of the system or
method (also known as IEMSPCA). The method of the present
invention can be generalized into the following steps as
detailed in Figure 25:
Step 400: New raw measurements are obtained with the
test measurement data possibly being received from
sensors. This step may include reading stored baseline
measurements from system memory.
Step 410: Background noise is filtered out of the
measurement data signal. This step may also include
filtering out background noise from the baseline
measurements.
Step 420: An enhanced PCA analysis is applied to the
data to generate the fault signature for the new
measurements. This step includes using WPT to decompose
the measure signals, applying PCA to the resulting data,
and applying the new statistical index Fc,i for fault
detection. This step may also involve normalizing the
- 31 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
data signal prior to applying a wavelet transform and
prior to the PCA analysis.
Step 430: Fault signatures are classified. This step may
involve assigning the generated fault signature to a
known or new fault type or declaring the signature as
indicating a healthy result.
It should be noted that the system and method of the invention
may be seen to have the following characteristics:
(1) the system is designed for industrial applications,
therefore the FDD method is fast and efficient, it works
accurately in noisy environments, and it is very easy to
use,
(2) the FDD performance is boosted by selecting the
right methods and connecting these methods seamlessly.
The specific configuration outlined in this document
outperforms most of the other FDD systems in terms of
performance, where performance is measured by the
consumed analysis time and the FDD result accuracy.
(3) the system of the invention is scalable to a
theoretically unlimited number of sensors for providing
the input data measurements, besides being able to work
on a variety of physical measurements since this system
is signal-based and, as such, minimal to no development
is needed to apply the technology to other applications.
The present invention may therefore be used in the fields listed
below. Such a list is non-limiting and the present invention
may also be used in other fields not listed below:
- Electric motors fault detection and diagnosis
- 32 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P0 .5CA01
- Automotive starters fault detection and diagnosis
- Automotive alternators fault detection and diagnosis
- Internal Combustion engines fault detection and diagnosis
- Gearboxes fault detection and diagnosis
- Electrical generators fault detection and diagnosis
In one aspect, the fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) system
can use any number of multiple sensors for signal input to the
FDD system. These inputs are the data source relating to the
machine or the mechanical system(s) being monitored. The system
also uses a background noise filtration subsystem that is used
to isolate background noise that is inevitable in manufacturing
and machine operation environments. Furthermore, the system uses
a fault detection and diagnosis subsystem or module. This
subsystem or module is the core of the overall system and it is
responsible for detecting and isolating faults. Fault signatures
are generated as an output that reflects the fault component in
the measurements. The system also uses a classifier that
matches the fault signature output from the fault detection and
diagnosis subsystem or module to one of the faults in a fault
library. This classifier translates the fault signature into a
readable output for the user that describes existing faults.
The present invention is applicable for use on mechanical,
electrical, and other physical measurements.
A noise gating technique may be used for background noise
filtration. This technique may include features such as a look-
ahead feature, an attack time feature, a release time feature, a
hold time feature, as well as a hysteresis feature. The noise
gating technique allows for the filtering out of noise from
- 33 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
different physical measurements such as sound and vibration
signals. In one implementation, the noise gating technique
filters out noise from signals by comparing the frequency
content of the measured signals with the frequency content of
noise samples of similar measurement types. A noise sample for
each measuremenL can be acquired by a separate dedicated sensor
or, for a machine monitoring application, the sample can be
acquired from the main sensors by collecting the background
noise when the machine being monitored is not operational.
For the actual fault detection and diagnosis, the system may use
wavelet analysis, PCA analyses as well as a statistical index F.
It should be noted that the system is not limited to using
wavelets for time/frequency analysis as other analysis methods
such as Short Time Fourier Transform (STFT) might be used as
well. The system detects faults and generates the fault
signature based on Comparing test measurements with baseline
measurements.
In one exemplary implementation, the system uses a Wavelet
Packet Transform (WPT) to perform the wavelets analysis.
Preferably, raw data is normalized before WPT is applied to the
data. For this normalization, baseline mean and variance values
are used for normalizing both the baseline and the test
measurements. In this implementation, the coefficients of each
atom from WPT are up-scaled using the corresponding wavelet
filter inverse before using these coefficients as inputs to PCA
analysis. After up-scaling, PCA is then applied on the up-
scaled coefficient of wavelets atoms at each frequency level of
the wavelet decomposition. Since the raw data was already
normalized, PCA analysis is used without any traditional
normalization techniques.
- 34 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
For this implementation, the fault signature is found by
calculating the statistical index F using the covariance of
Principal Components scores T=z,VP. This fault signature shows
the fault components in the measurements decomposed to different
frequency levels for each measured signal. This fault is of a
unique per fault type. The constructed fault signature is used
as an input to the classifier that translates the fault
signature into a readable output form to the user.
In this implementation, the classifier used is the logistic
discriminant classifier. However, it should be noted that the
system is not limited to using a logistic discriminant
classifier as the classifying method. Other classifiers might be
used as well. For this classifier, training is accomplished by
using a dataset that consists of fault signatures (F,...) and their
corresponding labels which describes the machine status (e.g.
"healthy" or the fault name such as "ball bearing"). The
classifier's training process is accomplished by finding the
optimal classifier weights that maximize the success rates of
diagnosing the faults.
The weights used in the classifier (i.e. the classifier weights)
may be initialized using Fischer Linear Discriminant (FLD)
analysis. These weights can then converge into the exact
weights using the logistic discriminant classifier. This
procedure is faster than finding the optimal weights solely
using a logistic discriminant classifier.
For this implementation, the logistic discriminant classifier
used is a multiple binary classifier with one for each machine
condition.
In this system, whenever a new measurements set is collected,
the fault signature is generated using the system's components.
- 35 -
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
The similarity of the generated fault signature to one of a
known set of fault signatures is measured by the logistic
discriminant classifier. This comparison results in a percentage
of similarity between the generated fault signature with Lhe
known fault signatures.
It should be noted that the logistic discriminant classifier can
be used in static or dynamic mode. In static mode, the
classifier takes the form of the standard logistic discriminant
classifier with its weights being initialized using Fischer
Linear Discriminant (FLD) analysis.
In dynamic mode, the logistic discriminant classifier may have
three different versions. The first dynamic mode version of the
logistic discriminant classifier is the same as the static mode
but with the addition of an introduced dynamic classification
feature. This feature defines a framework where the classifier
is continuously trained using the new data which extends the
classifier's capability and allows it to cope with small
consistent changes in manufacturing environments. The second
dynamic mode of logistic discriminant classifier is similar to
the first dynamic mode but with the addition of an update
frequency feature. This update frequency feature allows the
classifier to be retrained after a user defined number of tests
instead of being updating after every test. The third dynamic
mode of logistic discriminant classifier is similar to the
second mode but with the addition of a dynamic window fraction
parameter. This parameter allows for the control of the dynamic
and static fractions of the training dataset. This parameter
controls the classifier's adaptability to changes in the
manufacturing environments.
The system can thus be viewed as a signal based fault detection
and diagnosis (FDD) tool. The FDD method (IEMSPCA) is able to
- 36 -
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
detect faults and to automatically diagnose these faults without
human interaction. The system and the method are designed to be
used in industrial End-Of-Line testers as well as for monitoring
machinery health conditions while the machinery is in operation.
This signal based Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD) tool
allows it to work on a wide spectrum of physical measurements
types (e.g. voltage, sound, vibration). The method has three
main parts, including but not limited to:
1) the filtration of background noise,
2) the detection and extraction of the fault, and
3) the automatic classification of fault(s) detected.
For a better understanding of the above described invention,
reference may be made to the following documents:
[1]
N. Sawalhi, R. Randall and H. Endo, "The enhancement
of fault detection and diagnosis in rolling element
bearings using minimum entropy deconvolution combined with
spectral kurtosis", (Mechanical Systems and
Signal
Processing, 2007)
[2] P.
Paajarvi and J. P. Leblanc,"Method for rolling
bearing fault detection based on enhancing statistical
asymmetry", (2011)
[ 3 ]
M. A. Purdy,"Adjusting weighting of a parameter
relating to fault detection based on a detected
fault", (2014)
- 37 -
Date Recue/Date Received 2021-01-29
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
[4] P. Dutta, G. C. Keong, S. Nadarajan, F. Yang, X.
Zhao and K. Shyh-hao,"Asset condition monitoring", (2015)
[5] H. Yang, J. Mathew and L. Ma,"Vibration feature
extraction techniques for fault diagnosis of rotating
machinery: a literature survey", (2003)
[6] V. Ghorbanian and J. Faiz,"A survey on time and
frequency characteristics of induction motors with
broken rotor bars in line-start and inverter-fed
modes", (Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2015)
[7] M. J. Devaney and L. Eren,"Motor bearing damage
detection via wavelet analysis of the starting current
transient", (2004)
[8] B. R. Bakshi,"Multiscale PCA with application to
multivariate statistical process monitoring",(Aiche
Journal, 1998)
[9] H. Bendjama, M. S.
Boucherit and S.
Bouhouche,"FAULT DIAGNOSIS OF ROTATING MACHINERY USING
WAVELET TRANSFORM AND PRINCIPAL
COMPONENT
ANALYSIS", (Proceeding of the International Arab
Conference on Information Technology (ACIT),2010)
[10] S.
R. Hagshenas,"Multiresolution-Multivariate
Analysis of Vibration Signals; Application in Fault
Diagnosis of Internal Combustion Engines", (2013)
- 38 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
[11] S. F. Boll,"Suppression of acoustic noise in
speech using spectral subtraction", (Acoustics, Speech
and Signal Processing, IEEE Transactions on, 1979)
[12] J. S. Lim and A. V. Oppenheim,"Enhancement and
bandwidth compression of noisy speech", (Proceedings of
the IEEE,1979)
[13] J. Hodgson,"Understanding Records: A Field Guide
to Recording Practice", (Bloomsbury Publishing, 200)
[14] R. Martinek, L. Klein and P. Marek,"Novel signal
gate solution suitable for implementation in audio and
recording technologies", (2012)
The above described invention may be practiced by
implementing the various stages as either integrated or
separate software modules with each module performing
the functions described for each stage. Thus, a filter
module may perform the function of filtering background
noise from data signals, a PCA analysis module may
conduct PCA analysis of filtered modules produced by the
filter module, and a classifier module may classify the
fault signatures produced by the PCA analysis module.
Similarly, a normalization module may normalize the
filtered signals from the filtered module.
It should be noted that the systems, methods, and modules
according to the present invention may be implemented using
multiple methods. The present invention may be implemented
using ASIC (application specific integrated circuit) technology
or it may be implemented such that each block, stage, or module
is implemented separately from the other blocks, stages, or
- 39 -
CA 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
modules. Similarly, the present invention may be implemented
using any suitable data processing device including a general
data processor such as a general purpose computer.
Alternatively, the present invention may be implemented using a
dedicated data processing device specific for the use of the
present invention.
The embodiments of the invention may be executed by a computer
processor or similar device programmed in the manner of method
steps, or may be executed by an electronic system which is
provided with means for executing these steps. Similarly, an
electronic memory means such as computer diskettes, CD-ROMs,
Random Access Memory (RAM), Read Only Memory (ROM) or similar
computer software storage media known in the art, may be
programmed to execute such method steps. As well, electronic
signals representing these method steps may also be transmitted
via a communication network.
Embodiments of the invention may be implemented in any
conventional compuLer programming language. For example,
preferred embodiments may be implemented in a procedural
programming language (e.g."C") or an object-oriented language
(e.g."C++", "java", ."PHP", "PYTHON" or "C#"). Alternative
embodiments of the invention may be implemented as pre-
programmed hardware elements, other related components, or as a
combination of hardware and software components.
Embodiments can be implemented as a computer program product for
use with a computer system. Such implementations may include a
series of computer instructions fixed either on a tangible
medium, such as a computer readable medium (e.g., a diskette,
CD-ROM, ROM, or fixed disk) or transmittable to a computer
system, via a modem or other interface device, such as a
communications adapter connected to a network over a medium. The
- 40 -
,
ak 2965340 2017-04-28
Attorney Docket No. 1022P005CA01
medium may be either a tangible medium (e.g., optical or
electrical communications lines) or a medium implemented with
= wireless techniques (e.g., microwave, infrared or other
transmission techniques). The series of computer instructions
embodies all or part of the functionality previously described
herein. Those skilled in the art should appreciate that such
computer instructions can be written in a number of programming
languages for use with many computer architectures or operating
systems. Furthermore, such instructions may be stored in any
memory device, such as semiconductor, magnetic, optical or other
memory devices, and may be transmitted using any communications
technology, such as optical, infrared, microwave, or other
transmission technologies. It is expected that such a computer
program product may be distributed as a removable medium with
accompanying printed or electronic documentation (e.g., shrink-
wrapped software), preloaded with a computer system (e.g., on
system ROM or fixed disk), or distributed from a server over a
network (e.g., the Internet or World Wide Web). Of course, some
embodiments of the invention may be implemented as a combination
of both software (e.g., a computer program product) and
hardware. Still other embodiments of the invention may be
implemented as entirely hardware, or entirely software (e.g., a
computer program product).
A person understanding this invention may now conceive of
alternative structures and embodiments or variations of the
above all of which are intended to fall within the scope of the
invention as defined in the claims that follow.
- 41 -
